Those who belong to the People’s Power
generation[i]
may still recall the popular article entitled “The Miseducation of the
Filipino” by the late Renato Constantino. Although Constantino addressed his
grievances against the American colonial government, I think his approach in
analyzing the deep-seated problems of society remains valid until today. I do
not necessarily agree with some of the assertions he made in his essay,[ii]
but I do agree with his critical observations and emphasis on education.
I agree with the letter and spirit of his
statements that:
1.
“Education
is a vital weapon of a people striving for economic emancipation, political independence and cultural
renaissance.” However, I would like to add that it is not only a “weapon” (that
implies violence), but also a “tool” (that implies non-violence).
2.
Nationalism
is about the “correction of iniquitous relations,” pursuit of “economic emancipation,” and “appreciation for our
own culture.” However, I would like to caution that nationalism is not
necessarily anti-foreign, but only against “iniquitous relations.” Nationalism
does not absolutely rule out alliances with foreign states, if such alliance
supports the national interest.
3.
“The
most effective means of subjugating a people is to capture their minds.
Military victory does not necessarily signify
conquest. As long as feelings of resistance remain in the hearts of the
vanquished, no conqueror is secure… The moulding of men’s minds is the best
means of conquest. Education, therefore, serves as a weapon in wars of colonial
conquest… The American military authorities had a job to do. They had to employ
all means to pacify a people whose hopes for independence were being frustrated
by the presence of another conqueror.”
4.
“The
American view of our history turned our heroes into brigands in our own eyes, (and) distorted our distorted vision of the
future. The surrender of the Katipuneros was nothing compared to this final
surrender, this leveling down of our last defenses… Within the framework of
American colonialism, whenever there was a conflict between American and
Filipino goals and interests, the schools guided us toward thought and action
which could forward American interests.”
5.
“It
was understandable for American authorities to think that democracy can only
mean the American type of democracy, and
thus they foisted on the Filipinos the institutions that were valid for their
own people. Indigenous institutions which could have led to the evolution of
native democratic ideas and institutions were disregarded.”
6.
“Education
cannot be divorced from the society of a definite country at a definite time. It is a fallacy to think that
educational goals should be the same everywhere and that therefore what should
go into the making of a well-educated American is the same as what should go
into the making of the well-educated Filipino. This would be true only if the
two societies were at the same political, cultural, and economic level and had
the same political, cultural and economic goals.
7.
“The
pathetic results of this failure of Philippine education is a citizen amazingly naive and trusting in its relations with
foreigners, devoid of the capacity to feel indignation even in the face of insults
to the nation, ready to acquiesce and even to help aliens in the despoliation
of our national wealth. Why are the great majority of our people so complaisant
about foreign economic control? Much of the blame must be laid at the door of
colonial education. Colonial education has not provided us with a realistic
attitude toward other nations, especially Spain and the United States. The
emphasis in our study of history has been on the great gifts that our
conquerors have bestowed upon us. A mask of benevolence was used to hide the
cruelties and deceit of early American occupation.”
Are these statements still relevant today,
specially to the People’s Power generation?
Literally, they are not. The American
colonizers already withdrew from the country 75 years ago. However, if we apply
Constantino’s statements to our situation today, mutatis mutandis or “by
changing those things which need to be changed,” then they still are. Replace Constantino’s
references to the “Americans colonizers” with “Filipino oligarchs,” and all his
statements remain relevant, at least in spirit if not by the letter.
By “oligarchs” I refer to the family-based
conglomerates that play the role of “kingmaker,” outlast administrations, and
hijack government policy to suit their vested interests.[iii]
They subvert democracy by manipulating public opinion, procuring the loyalties
of educational institutions (i.e. administrators, professors, parents,
students) through disguised financing,[iv]
and spreading “fake news” and “false views” through mass media networks they
own or influence.
In colleges and universities, particularly
the so-called elite schools in Metro Manila (i.e. Ateneo, La Salle, UP), they
impart to their students a profound admiration of the oligarchs (who are all
over the public utilities, mass media and
natural resources), deep respect for the communists (who seek to grab power
through violent class conflict), and strong condemnation of all the puny
mortals who dare oppose them. Let me cite some examples of teachings in schools:
1. They would teach
about martial law declared by the Marcos administration
in September 1972, as a mere ploy to extend their terms in office, citing
the arrest and detention of many political personalities.[v]
However, they would not teach about the Plaza Miranda bombing that
terrorized and killed innocents in August 1971, that was initially blamed on
Mr. Marcos but later pointed at the CPP-NPA under Jose Maria Sison, in likely collaboration
with Mr. Ninoy Aquino, the presumptive presidential candidate of the Liberal
Party.[vi]
They also would not teach about the supply of arms by the Peoples’
Republic of China to the CPP-NPA, shown by the MV Karagatan incident in July
1972,[vii]
and the widespread communist insurgencies in Southeast Asia at the time, where
practically all neighboring countries were under martial law.[viii]
2. They would teach
about human rights violations of the Marcos administration, which allegedly
involved 3,257 extra-judicial killings during 1970s and 1980s, per Amnesty
International and the Task Force Detainees of the Philippines.[ix]
They also would teach about the 5,526 drug suspects killed from 2016 to
2019, as per data of the PNP and PDEA.[x]
However, they would not teach about the 43,000 fatalities between 1969
and 2008 from the armed rebellion of the CPP-NPA-NDF.[xi]
3. They would teach
about the Hello Garci scandal, where then President Arroyo was recorded calling Comelec Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano to allegedly
rig the results in her favor.[xii]
However, they would not teach about the role of the US Embassy in
instigating the Hello Garci and Hyatt 10 scandals, because of Arroyo’s alleged
refusal to align Philippine foreign policy with US foreign policy.[xiii]
They also would not teach about the role of IFES (International Federation
of Electoral Systems), a Washington based NGO funded by USAID and the US State
Department, in securing the entry into the country of the Venezuelan company
Smartmatic, to take full technical control of Philippine automated elections,
characterized by the disablement of basic safeguards against fraud.[xiv]
4.
They would
teach about the P171 billion of ill-gotten wealth recovered from the Marcos family by the PCGG during the period
from 1986 to 2017.[xv]
However, they would not teach about the questioned disposition by
President Cory Aquino in favor of her relatives and allies, of shares recovered
by the government in PLDT, PAL, Meralco and ABS-CBN.[xvi]
They also would not teach about the Disbursement Acceleration Program
(DAP) of President Noynoy Aquino, a secret budget declared unconstitutional by
the Supreme Court, valued at P144 billion from 2011 to 2013.[xvii]
5. They would teach
about the removal of Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno in May 2018, by the Supreme Court itself, as politically motivated simply
because she was an appointee of President Noynoy Aquino.[xviii]
However, they would not teach about the removal of Chief Justice Renato
Corona by impeachment in May 2012, who insisted “this (was) all about Hacienda
Luisita” because he recently led the Supreme Court to rule against the Aquino
family.[xix]
They also would not teach about the alleged bribery of senators by the
Aquino administration, to ensure Corona’s conviction, using public funds from
DAP.[xx]
Obviously, this kind of one-sided narrative hides the “whole truth”
from the people, directs their anger at those painted as villains, and enables the
oligarchs and the communists to go about their usual business of exploiting and
destroying the country. The mantra of miseducation reads like this: “Ninoy is a
hero. Cory is a saint. All their acts are good. All their enemies are evil.”
Admittedly, I too was a product of this miseducation at the Ateneo.
It took me almost 20 years to come to my senses and reject this mantra. Please
allow me to recall how I started my journey.
In law school, while Mr. Marcos still held the reins of power in Malacañang,
I joined a cause-oriented group called Sandata, affiliated with the
coalition of Bandila, that advocated socialist democracy. During the
snap elections of 1986, I volunteered for Namfrel, and got assigned to a
community near the international airport in Pasay City.
On February 22th, while attending a mass with Namfrel, a
radio playing just outside the church door, announced the breakaway of a
military faction. This caught everyone by surprise and caused a minor
disruption of the ongoing service. Immediately after the mass, I rushed to Camp
Aguinaldo, to see things for myself. No one was there that night, except for
about 20-30 people gathering at the large Santolan gate that was closed. I came
back during the next two days, together with a driver as companion. We blended
ourselves with the growing crowd.
On the 4th day, I decided not to go during the daytime,
but instead go at night, because I noticed that the crowd usually thinned at
nightfall. Later that day, the radio made another surprising announcement, that
Mr. Marcos already left Malacañang. With this news, I did not go back to Edsa
anymore, because there was no more reason to do so.
During the next 20 years after Edsa, I always fell back to the
mantra, whenever doubts entered my mind. These doubts came early though, like when
I almost voted NO to the 1987 Constitution, because I thought the bicameral
congress established was a big mistake. There were other issues, like the
diluted clause on territory that smelled of treason. In the end I relented,
because the country needed stability, and I thought we could always change the
constitution later.
Alas to my dismay, the very icon democracy, Cory Aquino, always
led the crowd of pro-oligarch and pro-communist voices who would block reform.
At the forefront of the blocking force was the formidable ABS-CBN of the Lopez
group. Four sitting presidents (i.e. Ramos, Estrada, Arroyo, Duterte) dared to
challenge them, and all attempts have failed so far.
My frustration however does not end there. The learned, whom I
thought should support constitutional reform, would instead push back to retain
the “status quo.” This is exactly what the oligarchs wanted, but the learned
were oblivious to it. Together, they would use the powerful mass media they
own, control or influence, to routinely condemn the innocent and acquit the
guilty, with impunity for all to see. All their acts were good, and all their
enemies were evil, and so they became merciless and unrepentant.
I guess the new version of miseducation foisted on the citizenry
since 1986, has succeeded beyond measure. Sadly, the miseducation has seeped so
deeply, even the children of senior officials of the Marcos administration,
would try so hard to hide or deny their affiliation, and awkwardly squeeze
themselves into the opposite crowd.
While I was anti-Marcos during those times, I do not think it is
fair to generalize. If their parents did not take part in any plunder, kept
their offices free from corruption, and steered clear of human rights violations,
what is there to be ashamed of? I have learned from experience that judging
people and their actions as right or wrong is never that simple. There will
always be wolves in sheep’s clothing.
To be clear, I’m not suggesting a contrary mantra that the
Marcoses are good, and the Aquinos are evil. What I’m saying, and do listen very
carefully, is that we should junk this false stereotyping because it resulted
from malicious miseducation. We should instead take all allegations cautiously,
and come to a judgment based only on reasonable evidence or the lack of it.
Only then can we give everyone what is due.
For the family and close friends of the oligarchs, I understand
where your sympathy lies. However, I will also ask you to understand that ordinary
folks like us have families too, and we comprise the vast majority of the people.
Know that we have neither the interest nor the capacity to take ownership of
the large corporations of the oligarchy. We only want them to stop misusing their
extra-ordinary power, to take control of government and reconfigure government
policy for their vested interests.
Many say that “mass media” is the “fourth branch of government,” holding
the power to convict the innocent and acquit the guilty, with seeming impunity.
Thus, I say that owners of mass media should NOT have proprietary interests in
other big businesses that seek government franchises or contracts (for public
utilities or natural resources). This is a clear case of conflict of
interest, where mass media attacks or defends the very government agencies
that their corporate affiliates deal with.
For those deeply hurt by the harsh words, foul mouth, dirty jokes
and aggressive posture of Mr. Duterte in dealing with his perceived enemies, again
I understand why. However, I will also ask that your hatred of the man, should
not outweigh your love for the country. Remember that Mr. Duterte is the
personification of an overwhelming protest vote against the regime of President
Noynoy Aquino. If the people voted for a foul-mouth candidate, it is NOT
because the voters were dumb. It is because they perceived the “decent” and
“rightful” candidates as wolves in sheep’s clothing, and so they rejected them.
If you want to know why you lost in 2016, stop looking at Mr.
Duterte. Instead, start looking at yourselves, your allies, your groups and all
the advocacies you stand for (like same-sex marriage, abortion rights,
defunding of the armed forces, funding for known communist rebels [reclassified
as Marcos human rights victims], church in politics, protection of oligarch
business, etc.). It is not enough to simply degrade your perceived enemy, and
magnify his shortcomings. You must also show that you have the better candidates
who do not smell like wolves.
I will quote here the wise words of Mr. F. Sionil Jose to “Remember this:
Marcos, Duterte – they are minor incidents in our history, but the oligarchic
families will be with us much longer and will most likely be replaced by heirs
who will continue to exploit our country and our people. The struggle to create
a just and sovereign nation transcends these politicians and their oligarch
allies. The Filipino oligarchy is our entrenched enemy – not I or those like me
who see and know the truth.”[xxi]
So where do we go from here? How do we address this deep-seated
problem of miseducation among the People’s Power generation?
For me, I would suggest that the DepEd and CHED, in close
consultation with the schools, colleges and universities, review all possible
instances of miseducation and one-sided narration to arrive at the “whole
truth” for presentation to the student population. Considering that some (if
not many) of the administrators, professors and teachers may themselves be
products of miseducation (like myself), and would hesitate (if not refuse) to
participate in this exercise to learn and spread the “whole truth,” any such
findings should be made freely available online via government websites
and popular social media (like Facebook). This way the students themselves will
have direct access, just in case their mentors in school will not go along.
I would also suggest that the national
government allocate modest resources to form a truth commission to go back in
time and review the important historical events that eventually led to deep
divisions within our nation State. These are
the events that created “dilawans,” “loyalists,” “pulahans,” and “jihadists,”
who now pose formidable obstacles to national unity. To heal the mortal wounds
inflicted by these events, the nation must go back in time to face the truth,
sift fact from fiction, clear the innocent, condemn the guilty, and give
everyone what is due.
I recall that when I first raised with our late advisor, Fr. Romeo
J. Intengan, S.J., the idea of a truth commission to review important
historical events, he immediately agreed, much to my surprise. He went on to
explain the need to arrive at the truth and give much needed guidance for the
many who were misled. I guess they knew and believed in this idea all along. I
was simply a latecomer whose only contribution was to do some legal research on
an old proposition.
The idea of a truth commission to review important historical
events later found its way to the Agenda for National Transformation adopted in
2016 by civil society groups and a national newspaper.[xxii]
Among the important historical events identified then were the Plaza Miranda
bombing (that revived the communist insurgency), and the Ninoy Aquino
assassination (that divided the nation
into opposing personality cults of Marcos and Aquino), and the Jabidah massacre
(that sparked a Christian-Muslim conflict).
Moving forward, we must learn the value of seeking the truth, the
“whole truth,” and nothing but the truth. We cannot leave our fate to those who
care only for themselves, their families or their ideologies. We will have to protect
our interests, not only with consistency, but more importantly with humility,
because indeed the truth will hurt us when it comes.
Nonetheless, we should not be dismayed by the formidable task
ahead. Know that we who seek the “whole truth” comprise the vast majority of
the country, and we have a clear view of the direction we have to take.
Maraming salamat po.
Atty. Dindo B.
Donato, General Counsel
Tanggulang
Demokrasya (Tan Dem), Inc.
14 July 2020. Makati City, Philippines.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this material are those
of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of
TanDem.
[i]
For this essay, I refer to the high school and college students, graduates, new
hires and young adults during the People’s Power revolution of 1986, and all
the younger generations that came after that until today.
[ii]
Here are some assertions of Constantino that I disagree with:
1) That
we should pursue the Filipino First policy to protect the business interests of
Filipino businessmen; this statement wrongly assumes that the profits
earned by Filipino businessmen from out of a captive Filipino market, that is artificially
protected from foreign competition even from legitimate players, will “trickle
down” to the Filipino workers and consumers; on the contrary, economic
experience shows that enterprise owners on one hand, naturally have conflicting
interests with enterprise employees and customers on the other hand; see Theory
of the Firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure, by
Jensen and Meckling (1976), https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0304405X7690026X;
Law of Supply and Demand, by Chappelow (2019), https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/law-of-supply-demand.asp;
today, the biggest dollar earners of the country are the OFWs (overseas
Filipino workers) who work for foreign employers overseas, and the BPOs
(business process outsourcing) that are generally owned by foreign investors; unfortunately,
we also have the highest power cost, slowest internet, unpredictable water
supply, untapped mineral and energy resources, and highly politicized mass
media, all them majority or wholly owned by Filipino businessmen, granted
artificial protection against legitimate foreign competition, by no less than
the Constitution; in reality, the Filipino First policy is nothing but a
Businessmen First policy;
2) That
the American educational system was deliberately designed to produce
generations of little brown Americans, “trained as citizens of an American
colony,” to impede their pursuit of independence; on the contrary, the entire
commonwealth exercise was geared towards independence; knowing their strong
sense of individual independence, I cannot accept the notion that America wants
to be the parent of a fully grown child who cannot fend for himself and instead
rely on daddy and mommy for free meals every day; the mindset of a typical American
parent would kick out this irresponsible child out of the house; at worst, the
American educational system was a pragmatic means of pacification by a
colonizer, to purposely re-channel the energies of Filipinos from violent “armed
struggle” to non-violent “political struggle” for independence; anything else
that resulted from this undertaking was more likely unintended or unplanned;
that the Americans exhibited superiority, while the Filipinos behaved with
inferiority, is a given, because the former were the conquerors and the latter
the conquered; however, for Filipinos to accept this inferiority “as if” it
were an inherent part of their humanity, would be stupidity of their own
making; remember that America itself was formed by people from the colonies or
territories of the United Kingdom and Spain;
3) That
the American educational system purposely crafted a backward agricultural
future for the Philippines, devoid of any vision for modern
industrialization; if that were truly the case, then the Americans should not
have introduced engineering and science courses, that were otherwise useless
for agriculture and useful only for industry; if the only picture that American
teachers could present was of a rural Philippines, showing a sturdy carabao,
smiling farmer and pretty lass, I surmise it was simply because that was the
economic state of the country at that time; recall that the main motivation for
education was simply pacification; anything beyond that, like the future
economic structure of country, was no longer their concern; the Americans would
have withdrawn from the country already, and it was up to the Filipinos how to
survive or thrive on our own;
4) That
the imposition of English as a medium of instruction by the American
educational system posed barriers to democracy (because the masses were
left uneducated), and impeded the thinking process on a people that spoke
different native languages; I would agree that the DepEd should continue to
review the appropriate age or student level when English, being a foreign
language, should be introduced and used as a medium of instruction; however,
the failure to provide English education to the masses actually meant that the
Americans should have done more, not less, to promote the democratization of
education and open the gates to the vast reservoir of knowledge written in
English, and too costly to translate into Tagalog or the other local languages;
nonetheless, I cannot help but notice that while Constantino deplored the
American imposition of English as a medium of instruction for Filipinos, he
ironically wrote write his critical essay in proficient American English;
5) That
the Philippine educational system should impose the “national language”
(meaning Tagalog) on the entire country, including the non-Tagalog
regions, because it was at least related to the other local languages, while
English was a totally foreign language; on the contrary, if knowledge were the
end goal of education, then it cannot be Tagalog (euphemistically called
Filipino), but should instead be English, because the vast reservoir of
knowledge we know is not in Tagalog, but rather in English; besides,
Constantino appears oblivious to the fierce nationalism of the other language
groups in the country; while a sizeable portion of the population has Tagalog
as its native tongue, there are actually 8 major languages in the country, and
more than 100 in all; more importantly, the population is comprised of 3
peoples, i.e. Christians, Muslims and Lumads, each one with its own unique
history, that is not commonly shared but at many times actually came into
conflict with one another; in other words, Constantino apparently presents the
view of the Christian Tagalog, and while he is entitled to that, so are the
rest of the people who are neither Tagalogs nor Christians; again I cannot help
but notice that Constantino repeatedly refers to the people as “Filipino,”
seemingly unmindful of the fact that the term is actually foreign and colonial
in origin, referring to King Philip II of Spain, the first foreign colonizer of
our archipelago.
[iii]
An Anarchy of Families, chapter on Rent-Seeking Families and the Philippine
State, Alfred W. McCoy, 1994.
Greed & Betrayal, Chapters 6, 11 & 15,
Cecilio T. Arillo, 2000.
[v]
Martial Law under Ferdinand Marcos.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law_under_Ferdinand_Marcos#:~:text=At%207%3A17%20pm%20on,country%20on%20February%2024%2C%201986.
[vii]
History of the Philippines (1965-1986).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Philippines_(1965%E2%80%931986)#Martial_law_(1972%E2%80%931981)
[viii]
Domino Theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory#:~:text=The%20primary%20evidence%20for%20the,(by%20the%20Khmer%20Rouge).
[x]
Philippine Drug War.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Drug_War#cite_note-feb19cnn-33
[xi]
Communist rebellion in the Philippines.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_rebellion_in_the_Philippines
[xii]
Hello Garci scandal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hello_Garci_scandal
[xiii] Gonzalo M. Jurado, Ph.D, The Present
as History: A Narration and Interpretation of Events, 31 December 2009, http://dodongakakakiko.blogspot.com/2010/01/hello-garci-and-aragoncillo-project_12.html
Transcript of Chargé d’Affaires Joseph Mussomeli’s interview on
ANC 21’s “Dateline Philippines,”with Ricky
Carandang, 08 July 2005.
Previously available at the US Embassy – Manila website at http://manila.usembassy.gov/.
Excerpt of ANC 21
interview:
Ricky: Can you
categorically tell us right now, sir, that the United States Government
supports the administration of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo?
CDA:
I could categorically tell you that we support the rule of law. Within that
context, we believe that the President is still the President, obviously. That
it is within her legal rights to remove her cabinet; her Cabinet is hers to do
with as she pleases, but that doesn’t mean we’re not disappointed in that. It
doesn’t mean that we’re not worried; this is something that distracts from the
reforms that she was committed to and we hope is still committed to. You know,
I know many of the Cabinet members who have resigned now, and the ones that I
know are all very decent, and good people, patriots -- people who are concerned
for the welfare of the Filipino people. So, it is a worrisome thing, but it is
certainly within her rights. (emphasis supplied)
Ricky:
Do you agree with the characterization of some of the President’s allies that
these cabinet members who spoke this morning are “adventurous?”
CDA: No, I couldn’t agree
with that. I know some of them very well, and the ones I know, frankly, have
accepted these posts as an act of patriotism and are concerned for the welfare
of the people. They could make a lot more money and have a lot more prestigious
roles in the private sector, but they have chosen to be in the Cabinet...
(emphasis supplied)
Ricky:
…that pertain to reports, widespread speculation that the United States may
have had some involvement on this. If you recall when the tapes first came out,
Secretary Bunye himself said that there were reports that the Americans had
something to do with it, and of course you said that you had nothing do with
it.
CDA:
Right, and that was actually proven true.
[xv]
Presidential Commission on Good Government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Commission_on_Good_Government#:~:text=Achievements-,Recovery%20of%20ill%20gotten%20wealth,since%20its%20creation%20in%201986.
PCGG: More than P171 billion in Marcos
family’s ill-gotten wealth recovered.
https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/657707/pcgg-more-than-p171-billion-in-marcos-family-rsquo-s-ill-gotten-wealth-recovered/story/
[xvii]
Infographic: What’s DAP? FAQs about the Disbursement Acceleration Program
https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/specialreports/372936/infographic-what-s-dap-faqs-about-the-disbursement-acceleration-program/story/
Timeline: The rise and fall of DAP
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/62024-timeline-rise-fall-disbursement-acceleration-program
Araullo v. Aquino, G.R. No. 209287, 01 July 2014.
http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/57044
[xviii]
Maria Lourdes Sereno
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Lourdes_Sereno#:~:text=Removal%20from%20office,-Main%20article%3A%20Quo&text=Deciding%20on%20the%20quo%20warranto,a%20vote%20of%208%E2%80%936.
[xix]
Corona: This is all about Hacienda Luisita
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/127711/corona-this-is-all-about-hacienda-luisita
[xx]
Impeachment of Renato Corona
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Renato_Corona#:~:text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20building%2C%20with,for%20Chief%20Justice%20Renato%20Corona.&text=Renato%20Corona%2C%20the%2023rd%20Chief,impeached%20on%20December%2012%2C%202011.&text=The%20Senate%2C%20convened%20as%20an,trial%20on%20January%2016%2C%202012.
Infographic: What’s DAP? FAQs about the
Disbursement Acceleration Program
https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/specialreports/372936/infographic-what-s-dap-faqs-about-the-disbursement-acceleration-program/story/
Timeline: The rise and fall of DAP
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/62024-timeline-rise-fall-disbursement-acceleration-program
[xxi]
The oligarchy and ABS-CBN: Don’t give them your ‘balls’, by F. Sionil Jose
(2020).
https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2020/05/18/2014744/oligarchy-and-abs-cbn-dont-give-them-your-balls
